[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - electricity=*

Lukas Richert lrichert at posteo.de
Thu Nov 5 14:32:12 UTC 2020

I have now switched over the tagging and examples to the namespace based 
tagging of grid and generator. Overall, this makes it easier and clearer 
to tag backup generators and grid-connected houses with solar panels etc 
IMO. Perhaps it would also be possible to then tag electricity:grid=yes 
and electricity=no in the case of grid connected houses experiencing a 
long-term power outage during a natural disaster?


Regards, Lukas

On 03/11/2020 22:07, Lukas Richert wrote:
> I also think the *electricity:grid=yes/no/backup* and 
> *electricity:generator=yes/no/backup* tags are clearer and would allow 
> for off-grid buildings to be tagged more distinctly.
> The electricity tag isn't used a lot yet. I have no experience with 
> automated or semi-automated edits, but perhaps changing 
> electricity=none and electricity=grid to electricity:grid=yes would be 
> relatively straightforward? (This is unfortunately the problem with 
> people adding major undiscussed/proposed tags to the main wiki. 
> Especially power_supply is frustrating. )
> What do others think about the tag options
>     electricity:grid=yes/no/backup
>     electricity:generator=yes/no/backup
>     electricity=yes
>     electricity=no
> [electricity=yes would be used when grid or generator is unknown] 
> instead of
>     electricity=grid
>     electricity=generator
>     electricity=yes
>     electricity=no
> Cheers Lukas
> On 03/11/2020 21:20, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>> On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 00:13, Lukas Richert <lrichert at posteo.de 
>> <mailto:lrichert at posteo.de>> wrote:
>>     Hi,
>>     While the original proposal did specify that generators are
>>     usually diesel, broadening the definition would only lead to a
>>     loss of detail, but the tagging would still be correct. I'm
>>     hesitant to use *offgrid* as a building that has, for example, a
>>     grid connection with solar panels on the roof would then be
>>     tagged as *electricity=grid;offgrid* instead of
>>     *electricity=grid;generator*. The former is illogical.
>>     However, I don't have any experience in developing countries: is
>>     it easier to verify if something is off-grid compared to if it is
>>     connected to a generator? And, would it be necessary to
>>     differentiate between local grids (i.e. 2-3 generators, no
>>     substations, transfromers, etc.) and national grids? Perhaps then
>>     a network tag would be useful, i.e. network=national, local,
>>     regional similar to the way cycle networks are mapped?
>>     A further suggestion was to change the tagging
>>     to***electricity:grid=yes/no/backup* and/or
>>     *electricity:generator=yes/no/backup*. This might be less
>>     ambiguous for tagging amenities or buildings that get electricity
>>     from both sources and would then be more consistent with tagging
>>     such as *electricity:generator:origin=diesel* when, e.g. a
>>     building has a backup diesel generator but is connected to the
>>     grid. Unfortunately, it would then not be consistent with the use
>>     by the Healthsites Mapping Project, although this already has the
>>     inconsistent *electricity=none* tag which should probably be
>>     changed directly to *electricity=no.*
>> Here is the link to that suggestion I made 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#multiple_values 
>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#multiple_values> and 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#origin_of_different_sources 
>> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/electricity#origin_of_different_sources>
>> The whole point of the proposal process is to identify these 
>> potential issues, resolve them, and get community agreement. If the 
>> goal is just to implement someone else's standard then we can't use 
>> the wisdom of the community here to improve the tag, therefore I'm 
>> not too fussed about making this match what another project is using, 
>> instead we should aim to have the best tags and documentation as the 
>> outcome of this proposal process. Then if that's different, other 
>> projects closely tied to OSM can migrate to the OSM community 
>> accepted schema.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201105/e93043bb/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list